System And Method For Analyzing Agent Interactions

ABSTRACT

A system and method for analyzing agent interactions is provided. An interaction between an agent and a business is provided to analysts. Performance scores for the interaction are received from each of the analysts and compared. A deviation between the performance score is determined. The deviation is compared to a threshold. Further interactions are provided to at least one of the analysts when the deviation falls below the threshold. A further performance score for the interaction is received from the analyst and provided to the agent associated with the interaction.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No.12/861,733, filed Aug. 23, 2010, pending; which is a continuation ofU.S. Pat. No. 7,783,513, issued Aug. 24, 2010; the priority dates ofwhich are claimed and the disclosures of which are incorporated byreference.

FIELD

The invention relates generally to measuring and improving businessperformance, and more specifically to a system and method for analyzingagent interactions.

BACKGROUND

Businesses interact with a plethora of customers on a daily basis acrossthe world, in order to conduct commerce in the modern age. A givenbusiness experiences its own universe of customer interactions ortransactions (“interactions” and “transactions” are used synonymouslyherein), which are necessary to maintaining a healthy and thriving stateof business-customer relationships; such a state of business-customerrelationships is necessary and vital to ensure the success of thebusiness.

In order to interface with the customers, businesses have adopted thecontact center model to provide personal service to the customers viateams of agents that engage in interactions with customers. Customerscommonly use the telephone and email as a means of contacting abusiness, such a center staffed with agents to field calls fromcustomers is commonly called a call center.

Call centers can vary in size from small units containing several agentsto large units containing teams of agents numbering into the hundreds oreven thousands. Often the call centers are large and require significantresources to staff, manage, and train the agents that comprise the callcenter. Call centers are managed by one or more managers whose jobsinclude both solving the complex customer problem, which presentsquestions beyond the authority of the agent to resolve, to supervisingthe agent's interaction with the customers so that the quality ofservice provided to the customers can be monitored and hopefullyimproved.

Accessing the quality of service provided to the customers by the callcenter agents has grown increasingly more difficult as call centers haveincreased in size. An agent handles many calls and/or emails a day;however, only a small fraction of the calls and/or emails fielded by anagent are ever monitored by a call center supervisor. Typically, callcenter agent performance is measured only once a week, at an agentlevel. This low frequency rate of monitoring does not provide anadequate measure of the agent's performance and the quality of serviceprovided to the customer. U.S. Pat. No. 5,535,256 to Maloney et al.provides a tool to the call center supervisor that is aimed atautomating the monitoring process within the constraints of a callcenter supervisor's ability to address the variety of tasks that thesupervisor is assigned to do. However, the call center supervisor cannotsample the agent's calls frequently enough and provide the necessaryfeedback to the agent that is required to increase the quality ofservice provided to the customers. Neither can the call centersupervisor increase the sales rate of the agents or the overall returnon investment with respect to the call center.

What is needed are affordable processes and systems for business contactcenters that are scalable to any size business which can also improvethe performance of the contact center agents, their business processes,and their customer interactions.

SUMMARY

One embodiment provides a system and method for analyzing agentinteractions. An interaction between an agent and a business is providedto analysts. Performance scores for the interaction are received fromeach of the analysts and compared. A deviation between the performancescore is determined. The deviation is compared to a threshold. Furtherinteractions are provided to at least one of the analysts when thedeviation falls below the threshold. A further performance score for theinteraction is received from the analyst and provided to the agentassociated with the interaction.

Still other embodiments of the present invention will become readilyapparent to those skilled in the art from the following detaileddescription, wherein are described embodiments by way of illustratingthe best mode contemplated for carrying out the invention. As will berealized, the invention is capable of other and different embodimentsand its several details are capable of modifications in various obviousrespects, all without departing from the spirit and the scope of thepresent invention. Accordingly, the drawings and detailed descriptionare to be regarded as illustrative in nature and not as restrictive.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The invention may best be understood by referring to the followingdescription and accompanying drawings that are used to illustrateembodiments of the invention. The invention is illustrated by way ofexample in the embodiments and is not limited in the figures of theaccompanying drawings, in which like references indicate similarelements.

FIG. 1 illustrates a system architecture for business customer-contactanalysis and improvement, employing wage attenuation, according to oneembodiment of the invention.

FIG. 2A illustrates one embodiment of high frequency contact centerinteraction monitoring.

FIG. 2B displays one embodiment of a score sheet.

FIG. 2C contains a continuation of the score sheet from FIG. 2B.

FIG. 3A illustrates a flow diagram for interaction analysis and feedbackaccording to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3B is a training flow chart according to one embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 3C illustrates an integration of calibration types, according toone embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3D is one embodiment of an Internet based agent level evaluationfeedback tool.

FIG. 4 illustrates real-time high frequency contact center monitoringaccording to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 5 illustrates a flow diagram for interaction analysis correspondingto FIG. 4.

FIG. 6 illustrates a flow diagram employing a high frequency data base,according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7 illustrates an example of increased profitability according toone embodiment of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In the following detailed description of embodiments of the invention,reference is made to the accompanying drawings in which like referencesindicate similar elements, and in which is shown by way of illustration,specific embodiments in which the invention may be practiced. Theseembodiments are described in sufficient detail to enable those ofordinary skill in the art to practice the invention. In other instances,well-known circuits, structures, and techniques have not been shown indetail in order not to obscure the understanding of this description.The following detailed description is, therefore, not to be taken in alimiting sense, and the scope of the invention is defined only by theappended claims.

Apparatuses and methods are described to allow businesses to increaseprofitability by monitoring a business's contact center processes athigh frequency with special feedback provided to the business's contactcenter. High frequency monitoring is achieved by employing geographicwage attenuation coupled with language fluency between theagent-customer contact and the analyst.

FIG. 1 illustrates a system architecture for business customer-contactanalysis and improvement, employing wage attenuation, according to oneembodiment of the invention. With reference to FIG. 1, geographic wageattenuation is shown generally at 100. A first geographic area 1 isindicated at 102, wherein wages are high relative to a second geographicarea 2 indicated generally at 104. Geographic area 102 and geographicarea 104 are connected by a communication network that allows thetransmission of information between the two geographic areas. Bothgeographic areas share at least one language in common and adifferential in wages between the first and second geographic areas. Forexample, in one embodiment, geographic area 102 corresponds to theUnited States (US), geographic area 104 corresponds to India and thelanguage shared in common is English. For a similar job, wages arehigher in the US than wages are for the similar job in India; therebyestablishing geographic wage attenuation between the two distinctgeographic areas.

As used in this description, sharing a language in common does not implythat the language is shared across the whole population of thegeographical area. It is sufficient that a number of people, howeversmall, can be found within the geographical area where the analysis ofthe customer contact is performed, which shares the language in commonwith a number of people in the second geographical area. No constraintis placed on the number of people in either geographical area.

In one example, wages in the US are $20 US per hour and wages in Indiacan be $4 US per hour for the same type of job. Wage attenuation will bedefined as follows: wage attenuation equals the wages in geographic area2 divided by the wages in geographic area 1. In the previous example thewage attenuation (0.2) is arrived at by dividing $4 by $20: 0.2=(4/20).Geographic area 1 or the first geographic area is the area where thebusiness's customers are located and possibly the business's agents arelocated; however, all of the business's customers and/or agents need notbe located in geographic area 1. Geographic area 2 or the secondgeographic area is the area where the analysis of the customerinteraction or transaction (“interaction” and “transaction” are usedsynonymously herein) occurs.

In another embodiment, geographic area 102 can correspond to Canada,England or Australia. Some examples of geographic area 104 can include,but are not limited to, countries such as Botswana, Kenya, Liberia,Nigeria, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, the Philippines, and Fiji,where the language in common is English. In another embodiment,geographic area 102 could correspond to France. Some examples ofgeographic area 104 can include, but are not limited to countries suchas Algeria, Rwanda, Senegal, and Haiti, where the language in common isFrench. In another embodiment, geographic area 102 could correspond tothe United States. Some examples of geographic area 104 can include, butare not limited to countries such as, Argentina, Dominican Republic,Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Republic of the Congo, Mexico,Nicaragua, Panama, and Uruguay, where the language in common is Spanish.No limitation is placed on the particular geographic areas comprisingthe geographic wage attenuator or the language shared in common betweenthe two geographic areas. In one or more embodiments, of the invention,a geographic area is a general area and need not be confined to theboundaries of specific countries as named herein. The geographic areacan be a general region and can include a part of a country or a part ofmore than one country.

Located within geographic area 102 are one or more businesses havingteams of agents interacting with customers of the business, indicatedgenerally at 106. Many types of agent-customer interactions can beanalyzed with the apparatuses and methods taught herein. Such examplesinclude, but are not limited to; inbound sales calls (to make and changereservations and sell tickets for travel on airlines, trains, boats,etc.) e-mails, trouble tickets, etc. Other interactions include,technical support calls subsequent to the purchase of a product orservice, including warranty support issues, etc. Calls to rent productsor services, such as automobiles, clothing, etc. The present inventionis not limited by the type of agent-customer interaction engaged in by abusiness. The interactions can consist of a telephone call, email, dataor any combination thereof.

The customers need not be confined to geographic area 102 but can belocated in a variety of geographic areas other than 102 and 104. Theagent/customer interaction data flow 110 proceeds from geographic area102 to geographic area 104 by means of a communication network. Theagent/customer interaction data flow is analyzed at high frequency at108 in geographic area 104. Analysts located in geographic area 104analyze an agent's customer interactions at a rate of at least oneinteraction per agent per day to create a high frequency analysis database 114. Special uses of the high frequency analysis data base will bedescribed in more detail below with reference to the figures thatfollow.

Feedback 112 flows from geographic area 104 to geographic area 102 andis communicated to the business's agents. Feedback 112 comprises theresults of scoring the agent's interaction with a customer and is usedto improve the agent's performance; thereby, increasing the business'sprofitability. Feedback 112 will be described more fully below withreference to the figures that follow.

The frequency at which an agent's interactions are analyzed can becontrolled by either the business within 106 or by the analysts within108. Typically, the agent's interactions with customers will be analyzedat approximately a rate of one interaction per agent per day, indicatedby X or a statistically relevant sample size based on the requirementsof a business. In some embodiments, the analysis rate can be greater andwill be indicated by a number preceding the X. For example, analyzing 4interactions per agent per day would be indicated by 4×.

FIG. 2A illustrates one embodiment of high frequency contact centerinteraction monitoring generally shown at 200. With reference to FIG.2A, geographic area 102 and geographic area 104 are connected bycommunication network 202. Communications network 202 can be theInternet or a special purpose network configured to facilitatecommunications between the geographic areas in order to practice theinvention. In one embodiment, communication network 202 can be acombination of general networks such as a business's intranet, theInternet, and special purpose networks configured to facilitate thepractice of the invention. Communication network 202 can also includeone or more satellites indicated by 204.

Within geographic area 102, one or more businesses engage in activitythat requires interactions between agents and customers of the business.The interactions can take the form of telephone calls or emails. Forsimplicity within this description, but without loss of generality tomultiple businesses, the discussion within the remainder of thisdetailed description of embodiments of the invention will be limited todescribing a single business. It will be recognized that the teachingsherein are scalable to businesses of any size and to a plurality ofbusinesses without limit on the number of businesses.

A business's customer contact center is indicated by agent team 210.Agent team 210 can contain a general number of agents as indicated inFIG. 2A within geographic area 102. The agent team need not all belocated within the same geographic area. For simplicity, only twogeographic areas have been presented herein, 102 and 104. Similarly, notall of the business's customers need to be located within geographicarea 102. The customers can be located in any geographic area and neednot be limited to the two geographic areas shown, 102 and 104. In one ormore embodiments, other communications networks (not shown) providecommunications between customers in other geographic areas and the agentteam 210 as well as providing communications between agent teams locatedin different geographic areas or an agent team distributed betweendifferent geographic areas.

Workstations for three agents are shown in FIG. 2A; however, a generalnumber of workstations and agents is anticipated. A first agent'sworkstation consists of computer 212 and telephone 214. Calls andcorresponding customer account information, for example, are combined at216 and stored on client's server 240. Similarly, a second agent'scomputer, indicated at 222 and telephone 224 are combined at 226 androuted to client's server 240. Client's intranet 238 can provide a datanetwork within the business's customer contact center operation. Ageneral maximum number of workstations is indicated by computer 232, andtelephone 234, which are combined at 236 and coupled with client'sserver 240 through intranet 238. Without limitation to the teachingspresented herein, intranet 238 can be a wired network, for example anEthernet line, a wireless network, for example a network according tothe 802.11(a) or 802.11(b) standard, or any other suitablecommunications network.

In one embodiment, all customer interactions, including voice andpertinent data are stored on the client's server 240 and/or on ananalysis server 258. The analysis server one (1) at 258 can provide abackup function to the client's server 240 or replace the client'sserver 240 according to a particular hardware configuration employedwith a particular business. In other embodiments, the agent/customerrecording function can be provided by commercially available systemssuch as systems from NICE® or WITNESS® which would provide an output tothe analysis server two (2) at 256 making these data available foranalysis in geographic area 104 by an analysis team 250. Variousprotocols can be used to provide these data such as voice over Internetprotocol (VoIP). Servers, such as 240 and 258, and any other device usedto store the storable representations can be any suitable deviceconfigured to store data; examples of which include, but are not limitedto, magnetic and optical disk drives, solid state memory, tape drives,etc.

Analysis team 250 is comprised of a team of individuals who are fluentin the language that the agents and customers converse in. Each analysthas a workstation as indicated by workstation 252 up to a general numberof analyst workstations 254 which receive data from analysis server 2indicated at 256. An analyst's workstation is typically configured as adesktop computer, which has a data display device such as a monitor,flat panel display, etc. The workstation is typically configured withone or more data input devices such as a pointing device, a computermouse, a touch pad, a keyboard, a voice activated interface including amicrophone, local storage (which can also be used to store the storablerepresentations of interactions), etc. The workstation need not beconfined to a desktop computer configuration; a laptop computer, ahandheld computer, and a wearable computer are all alternativeconfigurations for the workstation. In one embodiment, there will befewer analyst workstations than agent workstations since it is generallynot required to analyze every call that the agent makes. However, it ispossible to employ a number of analysts sufficient to analyze everyinteraction that is made by every agent with every customer. In oneembodiment, acceptable results are achieved with two to three analystsmonitoring 50 to 70 agents interacting with customers in the airlinereservation industry.

In one embodiment, the analysts review and evaluate agent/customerinteractions to ensure that the agents have met quality of servicecriteria established for a particular business. In one embodiment, theevaluation process includes the areas of core skills, soft skills,selling skills, and specific know how. The analysts check core skills byanalyzing the agent's method and competence in; answering the phone andgreeting the customer; getting the order in the system; answering basicquestions; and comprehension of a request made via email. Some reportingmetrics used for report generation include the average call handle timeand spelling and grammar used accurately during the interaction with thecustomer. Soft skills are checked by analyzing whether the agent'sgreetings are scripted; determining how “canned” the email responsesare; determining whether the agent can handle an irate customer underpressure; and analyzing the agent's knowledge of when to engage theagent's supervisor to resolve the call. Some reporting metrics used forreport generation for soft skills include whether the customer's issuewas resolved with the first call, this includes metrics related tospecific know how (i.e., technical support/knowledge), and how manyrepeat emails were required to resolve the customer's issue. Analyzingselling skills involves ranking the agent's ability to; recommendadditional products (cross-sell); sell more of the product underdiscussion by successfully understanding the tone and intonation of thecustomer during the interaction; and comprehension of the products andservices. Some reporting metrics used in report generation for sellingskills include measurements of the agent's up-sell and cross-sellperformance. In some embodiments, reporting can include scoringcompliance with regulations such as the Telephone Consumer ProtectionAct (TCPA) or other regulations.

For example, if the customer interaction consisted of an inbound salescall where a customer called to place an order for a product, such as acamera, some of the criteria the analyst will be looking for are whetherthe agent has opened the call properly, acted courteously, attempted toup-sell (i.e., sell a higher end camera), cross-sell and add-on-sell(i.e., selling film and a camera accessory bag with the original cameraorder) the customer, and checking to determine if the agent wasknowledgeable enough to meet the demands of the sale in order toaccomplish the up-sell or cross-sell (e.g., could the agent explain thefeatures and benefits and answer technical questions related to theproduct). Other criteria are employed as are appropriate for aparticular industry. For example, in one embodiment, analysts will gradethe interactions according to established quality monitoring criteriafor a particular industry sector or a particular business. In oneembodiment, an agent's performance is sampled at least once a day by theanalysts generating report data and agent feedback. Report data isstored in data base 114 for later use and a portion thereof is tailoredfor the business and the business's agents at 108. Feedback is providedto the business and the agents at 260.

Wages earned by workers in geographic area 104 are lower than wagesearned by workers in geographic area 102; thereby, creating geographicwage attenuation between the respective geographic areas. High frequencyanalysis of the agents' quality of service, provided to customercontacts, can be achieved while simultaneously increasing the business'sprofits. In one or more embodiments, a debit or a credit will betransferred in exchange for services provided by the analysts. Anexample of a debit is an invoice or a bill to show what is owed and anexample of a credit is payment in the form of valuable consideration.

FIG. 2B and FIG. 2C display an embodiment of a score sheet that can beused by an analyst to evaluate and score a transaction between an agentand a customer. With reference to FIG. 2B, a score sheet is showngenerally at 260 a and continues onto FIG. 2C at 260 b. Score sheet 260a can be provided in many different ways, the embodiment depicted withinthe figures is but one of the many different formats that can be used toevaluate an agent/customer transaction. Score sheet 260 a/260 b can beconfigured as a software application that is displayed on the analyst'sworkstation, such as workstation 252 in FIG. 2A. Alternatively, scoresheet 260 a/260 b could be displayed on any data display configured tointeract with the flow of data emanating from geographic area 102 (FIG.2A), which is accessible to analysts in geographic area 104 (FIG. 2A).

An analyst evaluates a transaction between an agent and a customer byreplaying or reviewing a stored representation of the transaction andthen assigning a score to the components of the agent/customerinteraction based upon an evaluation of the transaction. In oneembodiment, the evaluation proceeds with the analyst replaying a storedrepresentation of a telephone call. In another embodiment, theevaluation proceeds when the analyst reviews an email exchange betweenan agent and a customer. In other embodiments, the interaction canconsist of a combination telephone call and email exchange between theagent and the customer or the interaction can be embodied in otherformats. In the example shown in FIG. 2B and FIG. 2C, an evaluationconsists of scoring a telephone interaction between an agent and acustomer. The interaction can be broken down into the major categoriesof “Call Opening” 264, “Customer Service Skills” 272, “Call Closing”280, “Knowledge, Accuracy and Resolution” 282, “Call management” 284,“Sales” 286, “Comments Summary” 288, and “Even better tips” 290.

In the embodiment shown, “Call Opening” 264 has subcategories that arescored individually by the analyst. For example, the degree to which theagent used the proper greeting is assigned a score by the analysts atlocation 266. The score can be assigned using any suitable grading scalesuch as a numeric scale, an alphabetical scale or other scale created torank the agent's performance. In one embodiment, a numeric scale can beused having a range of values from 1 to 10, where 1 indicates minimumcompliance and 10 indicates maximum compliance. Other ranges can beused, such as 1 to 5; no limitation is implied by the ranges given inthis description. Another subcategory, “Asked for Transaction ID,” isassigned a score after evaluation in location 268. The scoring for item268 can be according to a two state yes/no score rather than a scorethat comprises more than two states. The other subcategories are scoredand the analyst can enter comments pertinent to the category orsubcategory in field 270.

The other major categories 272, 280, 282, 284, and 286 are scored in asimilar way, whereby the analyst assigns scores to the subcategories andcomments as needed. A total score (not shown), representing theevaluation of the interaction, can be assigned either automatically by ascoring algorithm, as part of a computer based application, or by theanalyst.

With reference to FIG. 2C, fields for “Comments Summary” 288 and “Evenbetter tips” 290 are provided. The analyst can provide a comment summaryin field 288, if it is deemed necessary, after completing theevaluation. Additionally, the analyst can provide “Even better tips” infield 290. In one embodiment, “Even better tips” can include one or moreelements of an interaction that the agent performed well and one or moreelements of the interaction that the agent could perform even better,with a suggestion from the analyst explaining how the agent mightachieve the increased performance. In another embodiment, the “CommentsSummary” 288 can include one or more elements that the agent performedwell and the “Even better tips” 290 can include one or more elementsthat the agent could perform even better.

In one embodiment, the score sheet can serve as a training aid to theanalyst by apprising the analyst of new information pertinent to thebusiness's activity or reminding the analyst of information that is ofparticular importance. For example, in FIG. 2B, field 262 can beimplemented as a scrolling update bar in a window on a data display forthe benefit of the analyst; thereby, displaying information as shown inthe figure. Training the analysts will be described more completelybelow in conjunction with FIG. 3B.

FIG. 3A illustrates a flow diagram for interaction analysis and feedbackaccording to one embodiment, generally shown at 108. With reference toFIG. 3A, analysts review and evaluate transactions between agents andcustomers at 300. Such evaluations can be performed according to thedescription associated with FIG. 2B and FIG. 2C. Initially, acalibration loop 302-304-306 provides uniformity in scoring an agent'sperformance by submitting the same agent's data to the entire team ofanalysts multiple times and reviewing the scored results between theanalysts until the variation between analysts' scores of the sameagent's data is within acceptable limits (internal calibration). Thesame calibration process follows between the team of analysts and theagent's specific team supervisor and/or manager. The agent, the agent'steam supervisor or the agent's manager can be referred to as the client,in such a case, calibrating the analysts to one or more of theseentities associated with the particular business can be referred to as a“client calibration.” Acceptable calibration limits will be determinedby the requirements of particular businesses; however, in oneembodiment, a deviation of five percent (5%) between individualanalyst's agent-scores (internal calibration) is one example of anacceptable level of uniformity and a deviation of five percent (5%)during a client calibration is one example of an acceptable level ofuniformity.

Calibration of the interaction evaluation process can also be performedby using Anonymous Transaction Simulations (ATS). During an ATScalibration, a common transaction is delivered to all or a specificgroup of analysts to score. The scoring can also include the analystsadding their particular even better tips. During the ATS calibration,the analysts are unaware that the transaction is a common replicate. Thecommon transaction need not be an actual transaction, but it can be atransaction designed to test a particular category or subcategory of atransaction. The agent's manager, supervisor or the analyst's supervisoror subject matter expert (described in conjunction with FIG. 3B) can usethe ATS to test specific training updates, issues or unique customerinteraction scenarios.

Further calibration can be provided by the analyst's supervisor orsubject matter expert in the form of a random quality audit. In oneembodiment, during a random quality audit, the analyst's evaluation (s)of one or more agent/customer interactions are evaluated by theanalyst's supervisor, subject matter expert, or equivalent manager.

As previously described in conjunction with FIG. 2A, agent teams(sometimes referred to as customer contact centers or call centers) canbe located in different geographic areas or at different locationswithin a single geographic area. Therefore, a business can have aplurality of customer contact centers across which the previouslydescribed calibration processes can be performed. One or more of thesecustomer contact centers can be located internal to the business and oneor more of these customer contact centers can be located external to thebusiness. The calibration processes described herein are equallyapplicable to a mixture of internal and external customer contactcenters. An example of an internal customer contact center is, but isnot limited to, a center operated under the control of the business. Anexample of an external customer contact center is, but is not limitedto, a customer contact center that is operated under limited control orinfluence by the business, such as by contractors or a contractorprovided service via an external customer contact center.

The transaction score 304 and even better feedback 302 are sent to thebusiness at 308. Feedback is provided to the respective agents at 310.Agents can respond to the feedback at 312 and the business providesinput at 314. Depending on the agent's response and the input from thebusiness, recalibration of the analysts may be required at 316. Theprocess described in FIG. 3A is flexible and accommodates agents'responses and the contact center management's response by customizingscoring as needed. In one embodiment, the even better feedback 302includes informing an agent of an agent performance element that waswell performed, and informing the agent of a performance element thatcould be performed even better than the way the agent presently performsthe element. Additionally, the even better feedback 302 can includetraining tips, provided as appropriate to contact center management orthe agent based on analyzing the agent's interaction with customers.

In various embodiments, the invention can be applied to suit the needsof any business. Specific knowledge about the procedures, processes,products, and/or services of any business can be assimilated by theanalysts during training; thereby, allowing the analysts to become anextension of the business's customer contact center. FIG. 3B displays atraining flow chart at 320, according to one embodiment of theinvention. With reference to FIG. 3B, “Business's training criteria” 322includes information relevant to the business that needs to beconsidered in the context of evaluating an agent/customer interaction.Information 322 flows as needed to a subject matter expert 324. Thesubject matter expert 324 ensures that the pertinent information, 322,is disseminated to and assimilated by the analysts as needed. Asindicated previously in conjunction with FIG. 2B at 262, the subjectmatter expert can provide training updates to the analysts. The subjectmatter expert effectively functions as a knowledge hub, maintaining aknowledge base and communicating this knowledge, comprising product,service, process, updates, etc. to the analysts.

In one or more embodiments, analysts receive training in block 326; thetraining is based on the requirements that are compiled by the subjectmatter expert in 324. In one embodiment, an analyst's training includesreading an update when the analyst logs onto a workstation, such as 252in FIG. 2A, before the analyst can proceed to evaluate agent/customerinteractions. The analyst can be required to check a confirmation boxbefore being allowed to proceed to evaluations.

The analysts' knowledge can be improved by the subject matter expert,such improvement directly enhances client calibration results; therebyminimizing discrepancies between an analyst's score and the score thatan agent's manager would give for the same interaction. Internalcalibration is also improved by increasing the analyst's knowledge ofinformation 322 and other training criteria 321 as is appropriate. Thesubject matter expert can improve the analysts' knowledge by creatingknowledge testing programs. In one embodiment, test questions arecompiled by the subject matter expert and passing criteria are set at328. If an analyst meets the passing criteria by achieving a passinggrade on the knowledge test then that analyst can proceed to performevaluations of interactions. Those interactions will continue to be thesubject of ongoing calibration as indicated at 332. Ongoing calibrationwill be described more fully in conjunction with FIG. 3C. If the analystdoes not meet the passing criteria at 328 then further training isindicated by path 330.

At times it may be desirable to communicate urgent updates to theanalysts in the form of a verbal communication from the subject matterexpert, some other person or an automated system. In such a case, atransaction hold can be administered, which would prevent the analystsfrom evaluating transactions until the analysts are addressed and thehold is removed.

In some embodiments, the training described herein with respect to theanalysts can be directed to the business's agents. This training can beadministered in the form of training updates, quizzes, or onlineexercises. Agent training can be adapted to the specific needs of aparticular business.

In other embodiments, other training criteria 321, such as knowledgeamassed from services provided to a first business can be directedtoward improving the performance of a second business. Other trainingcriteria 321 can include data accumulated from the high frequencyevaluations of the agent/customer interactions as well as the trainingcriteria and knowledge assembled by the subject matter expert or otherpersonnel or automated system.

Various types of calibration were described in conjunction with FIG. 3A,these individual types of calibration can be combined and applied toboth minimize the length of time needed to train and deploy a team ofanalysts to commence evaluation of a business's customer transactions,and to minimize the length of time required for a business's agent teamto gain operational competency with respect to the subject matter of thebusiness.

Seasonal or limited duration agents, such as non-full time employees orcontractors, present training problems for many businesses since theseagents are typically hired for a short period of time and the agentsmust be trained in an even shorter period of time. For a business toenjoy a productive period of working time from these agents, the agentsmust be trained in a time period that is shorter than the duration ofthe season or time period for which they were hired to work in.Therefore, it is desirable to shorten the training period of the agentsas much as possible.

In one embodiment, of the invention, a calibration process for abusiness's agents is described with the aid of FIG. 3C. In thisembodiment, the agents can be short duration or seasonal employees orcontractors. No limitation is implied by the type of work relationshipthat exists between the person (agent) and the business, e.g., agent,employee, or contractor. With reference to FIG. 3C, a table 338 displaysa calibration timeline, where time proceeds down the rows of the table338, e.g., 342, 344, 346, and 348. The types of calibration aredisplayed as columns in table 338, e.g., 352, 354, 356, and 358.

In this embodiment, the analysts are trained for two (2) weeks asdescribed in conjunction with FIG. 3B; thereby, allowing the analysts toassimilate the pertinent information from sources 322 and/or 321 (FIG.3A). This two week training period is indicated at row 340, column 350in FIG. 3C. Week one consists of a nesting period, row 342, where onehour of client calibration 352 and one hour of internal calibration 354is undertaken daily to ensure that the analysts produce evaluations thatare consistent with evaluations that the client would produce and thatthe analysts' evaluations are internally consistent. Also within thefirst week, Anonymous Transactions Simulation (ATS) are administered atthe rate of one (1) transaction per agent per day at 356. The analysts'evaluations are audited within column 358 for quality at the rate oftwenty (20) percent of the total evaluations performed to ensure rapidconvergence of the analysts' evaluations and to spot problems that mightneed to be addressed early in the calibration process.

During week two (2), indicated by row 344, the client calibration 352 isreduced to three (3) hours a week and the internal calibration 354 isreduced to three (3) hours a week. During this second week, the ATS rate356 can be decreased to two (2) transactions per agent per week and thequality audit 358 can be decreased to ten (10) percent of totaltransactions evaluated.

During week three (3), indicated by row 346, the client calibration 352is reduced to two (2) hours a week and the internal calibration 354 isreduced to two (2) hours a week. During this second week, the ATS rate356 can be decreased to one (1) transaction per agent per week and thequality audit 358 can be decreased to five (5) percent of totaltransactions evaluated. Presumably, the seasonal employees of thebusiness (agents) are learning the material required for their seasonaljob with the passage of time and the frequency of the types ofcalibration administered can be reduced as the passage of the successiveweeks indicates.

In the fourth and subsequent weeks, indicated by row 348, ongoingcalibration will consist of two hours of client calibration 352 a week,two (2) hours of internal calibration 354 a week; one (1) ATStransaction per agent per week 356; and a five (5) percent quality audit358 of transactions evaluated.

In the previous description, durations of the various types ofcalibration were given as examples; no limitation is implied by thesedurations such as numbers of weeks, hours, percentages, etc. Thesequantities are illustrative of one embodiment. Other time periods andfrequencies are possible and appropriate to meet the particular needs ofspecific businesses and business objectives.

In one or more embodiments of the invention, communication betweenagents, analysts, support personnel (subject matter experts), etc., andthe respective managers is accomplished with the aid of the networksdescribed in conjunction with the previous figures. Components of anintegrated software application that incorporates the previouslydescribed functionality is illustrated in FIG. 3D, according to oneembodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3D is one embodiment of an Internet based agent level evaluationfeedback tool, shown generally at 360. With reference to FIG. 3D,analyst evaluations are indicated within block 362. The analysts receivetransactions and the appropriate evaluation criteria based on aparticular business and the pertinent product/service knowledge. Theevaluations of the agent/customer interactions involve monitoring thetransactions at an agent level, scoring evaluations, reporting on trendsand opportunity areas for the business, providing even better tips,compliance monitoring, and other feedback as needed by the particularbusiness, as well as making this information available to the business.

As previously described, these evaluations 362 are the subject ofdifferent types of calibration; internal calibration, clientcalibration, Anonymous Transaction Simulations (ATS), and qualityaudits, all indicated generally at 364. These calibrations raise theperformance level of the analysts and the business's agents aspreviously described.

In one embodiment, an Analyst's Console 366 provides the analyst withproject updates, is used during calibration, displays quality andproductivity scores, can be used for knowledge testing and othercommunications from, for example, the subject matter expert or others aspreviously described.

In one embodiment, the Supervisor's Console 368 provides the analysts'supervisor with data on one or more of the particular campaigns that canbe in progress for one or more businesses, which are being supported bythe analysts as described herein. Supervisor's Console 368 can provideinformation to the supervisor, such as but not limited to; real-timecampaign results, project updates, agent team and/or agent levelreporting, subject matter expert (SME) feedback, transactionevaluations, etc.

In one embodiment, a SME/Management Console 370 can be used to provide areporting suite for analysis, track training updates, provide trainingsuggestions, maintain a knowledge base, etc.

In one embodiment, information is divided between the analyst side, asdescribed above, and the client (business) side. The client side caninclude a Client Agent Console 372, which can provide feedback to theagents on items such as the agent's customer interactions that wereevaluated and the associated scores, comments, even better feedbacktips, etc. Client Agent Console 372 can also include agent improvementresults or lack of improvement, previous transactions identified foragent self-awareness, etc. Client Agent Console 372 can also provide theagent with training updates, quizzes, and on-line exercises as needed tosuit a particular business's need.

In one embodiment, a Client Supervisor Console 374 can provide data suchas, agent level scores, top defects in agent performance, stack rankingof agents' performance, agent team reports, trend analysis, individualand agent team based improvements, training suggestions, and improvementmargins.

In one embodiment, a Client Manager & Executive Console 376 can includeagent and agent team trends, stack ranking, top defects, training andprocess improvement suggestions, agent team performance improvementmargins, etc.

In general, the consoles described in relation to FIG. 3D can betailored to the needs of any business that requires customerinteractions. The description of information available on the variousconsoles of FIG. 3D is illustrative of one or more embodiments of theinvention and is not to be taken in a limiting sense. Various othercompilations of information and functionality will be apparent to thoseof skill in the art from the teachings presented herein.

FIG. 4 illustrates real-time high frequency contact center monitoringaccording to one embodiment of the invention, generally shown at 400. Abusiness's customer contact center is indicated by agent team 410 withingeographic area 102. Not all of the business's customers need to belocated within geographic area 102. The customers can be located in anygeographic area and need not be limited to the two geographic areasshown, 102 and 104. Agent team 410 can contain a general number ofagents as indicated in FIG. 4 within geographic area 102. The agent teamneed not all be located within the same geographic area. For simplicity,only two geographic areas have been presented herein, 102 and 104. Othercommunications networks (not shown) provide communications betweencustomers in other geographic areas and the agent team 210 as well asproviding communications between agent teams located in differentgeographic areas or an agent team distributed between differentgeographic areas.

A first agent's workstation consists of computer 412 and telephone 414.Calls and corresponding customer account information, for example, arecombined at 416 and are available to conference via 440 to the analysisteam 450 in the second geographic area 104. Similarly, a second agent'scomputer indicated at 422 and telephone 424 are combined at 426 androuted to call conferencer 440. A general maximum number of workstationsis indicated by computer 432. Computer 432 and telephone 434 arecombined at 436 and routed to 440.

Communications network 202 couples geographic area 102 with geographicarea 104 allowing information to flow between the respective areas.Communications network 202 can include one or more satellites asindicated by 204. Communications network 202 facilitates the flow ofagent/customer calls from call conferencer 440 in geographic area 102 toswitch 456 in geographic area 104. Call conferencer 440 can include adevice such as an automatic call distributor (ACD).

Analysis team 450 is comprised of analysts and analyst workstations 452up to a general number indicated by 454. Agent/customer calls aredistributed to analysts through switch 456 providing real-timemonitoring by the analysts. Near real-time high frequency interactionanalysis 460 provides the agent with nearly immediate feedback 470 onhis or her performance during the customer contact. Such feedback to anagent enhances learning and decreases learning curve time, generallyapparent with new agents. Ongoing analyses of agent/customerinteractions are compiled in the high frequency data base 462.

Wages earned by workers in geographic area 104 are lower than wagesearned by workers in geographic area 102; thereby, creating geographicwage attenuation between the respective geographic areas. High frequencyanalysis of the agents' quality of service, provided to customercontacts, can be achieved while simultaneously increasing the business'sprofits. In one or more embodiments, a debit or a credit will betransferred in exchange for analysis services provided by the analysts.An example of a debit is an invoice or a bill to show what is owed andan example of a credit is payment in the form of valuable consideration.

Within the figures presented in this detailed description ofembodiments, separate paths have been used to depict the flow ofcustomer interaction data and feedback from the analysis of these datafor simplicity, no limitation is implied by this depiction. It will berealized by those of ordinary skill in the art that communicationsystems can support bidirectional communication over a singletransmission line. Such bidirectional systems could be represented by asingle line or path between points in a communications link, nolimitation is implied thereby.

In one embodiment, FIG. 5 illustrates a flow diagram for interactionanalysis corresponding to FIG. 4 and generally depicts the process at500. With reference to FIG. 5, in one embodiment, transactions originatein the first geographic area 502; customers and agents can be located ingeographic areas other than 102, as described in conjunction with theprevious figures. Analysts in the second geographic area 504 evaluatethe transactions in near real-time to provide concurrent feedback to theagent. Calibration of the evaluation process is indicated by acalibration loop 506-508-510 to provide uniformity in scoring an agent'sperformance by conferencing the same agent's call to the team ofanalysts and reviewing the analysts' responses with the analysts(facilitated by an analyst supervisor or other facilitator) until thevariation between the analysts' responses to the same agent's data iswithin acceptable limits. Acceptable calibration limits will bedetermined by the requirements of particular businesses; however, in oneembodiment, a deviation of three percent (3%) between individualanalyst's agent-scores is one example of an acceptable level of quality.

Even better feedback at 506, along with the transaction, scored at 508,is provided to the agent in near real-time. Information from theanalysts can be displayed directly on an agent's computer monitor suchas computer 412, 422 or 432. In one embodiment, near real-time resultsare sent to the business's contact center management at 512 as well asother levels of the business organization as are appropriate. Feedbackis received from the agent at 514, input on the analysts' reports andeven better performance suggestions are analyzed by the business andinput is fed back to a recalibration process 518 that ensures that thescoring 506 and 508 are in accordance with the goals of the particularbusiness. Following this process, embodiments can be adapted and scaledto the needs and size of particular businesses.

In one or more embodiments, FIG. 6 illustrates a flow diagram employinga high frequency data base, generally shown at 600. With reference toFIG. 6, the high frequency data base representing the accumulation ofdata on agents' performance during contact center interactions iscollected on a substantially continuing basis and is used by a businessto guide the business's future decisions with respect to hiring an agentfor a particular job. At 602, an agent applies for a job with aparticular business. The agent applicant takes a test at 604 todetermine the prospective agent's suitability for the particular job.The agent is interviewed for the particular job at 606 and a decision tohire the agent is made at 608 based in part on the agent's application,interview, and the high frequency data base. The high frequency database can be used to filter the application and interview elements basedon agent characteristics that have been found to correlate withsuccessful agent performance. For example, in one embodiment, it hasbeen discovered that an agent's ability and propensity to up-sell duringa sales call is increased if the agent personally participates in anduses the product that the customer is asking about. Therefore, incertain fields, the business will prefer to hire applicant's who havepersonal experience using products that the business is selling.

Following hiring, training occurs at 610. Training times are alsorecorded in the high frequency data base and are also used to guidefuture hiring decisions. Process 612 can include an accelerated 4×monitoring phase that in one or more embodiments is useful to trainagents in certain industries. For example, when a new seasonal line ofclothing is introduced, it is advantageous to enhance the feedback thatagents receive by monitoring the agents' performance six times a day(6×). In another embodiment, when a new promotional program isintroduced, such as a new cruise line vacation package, 4× trainingprovides for a shorter learning curve for the agent which results inrevenue improvement for the business.

FIG. 7 illustrates an example of increased profitability according toone embodiment of the invention. With reference to FIG. 7, a singleagent's contribution to increasing the profitability of a business isshown generally at 700. Single agent activity is shown in column 702.Existing agent performance without the improvements taught herein isshown in column 704. The enhanced agent performance provided by theteachings according to one embodiment of the invention provides anincrease in the agent's up-sell rate from 8.0% (704) to 8.8% (706). Thisup-sell rate increase is applied to 4.96 up-sell transactions a day(704) increasing the number of up-sell transactions to 5.46 (706).Up-sell revenue is increased from $124.00 (704) to $150.04 (706).Subtracting these two numbers provides a revenue improvement of $26.04as indicated at 710. A profit margin of 50% on the revenue improvementof $26.04 produces an increased profit of $13.02 as indicated at 712.The average daily cost to the business for the analyst is $1.50 with ageographic wage attenuation of 0.2, resulting in a daily return oninvestment (ROI) of 768% as indicated at 716.

It will be appreciated that the methods described in conjunction withthe figures may be embodied in machine-executable instructions, e.g.software. Alternatively, some of the methods can involve theparticipation of an operator with a general-purpose processor that isprogrammed with the instruction to perform the operation described. Theinstructions can be used to cause a general-purpose or special-purposeprocessor that is programmed with the instructions to perform theoperations described. Alternatively, the operations might be performedby specific hardware components that contain hardwired logic forperforming the operations, or by any combination of programmed computercomponents and custom hardware components. The methods may be providedas a computer program product that may include a machine-readable mediumhaving stored thereon instructions which may be used to program acomputer (or other electronic devices) to perform the methods. For thepurposes of this specification, the terms “machine-readable medium”shall be taken to include any medium that is capable of storing orencoding a sequence of instructions for execution by the machine andthat cause the machine to perform any one of the methodologies of thepresent invention. The term “machine-readable medium” shall,accordingly, be taken to include, but not be limited to, solid-statememories, optical and magnetic disks, and carrier wave signals.Furthermore, it is common in the art to speak of software, in one formor another (e.g., program, procedure, process, application, module,logic . . . ), as taking an action or causing a result. Such expressionsare merely a shorthand way of saying that execution of the software by acomputer causes the processor of the computer to perform an action orproduce a result.

As used in this description, “one embodiment,” “one or moreembodiments,” “an embodiment” or similar phrases means that feature(s)being described are included in at least one embodiment of theinvention. References to “one embodiment” or any reference to anembodiment in this description do not necessarily refer to the sameembodiment; however, neither are such embodiments mutually exclusive.Nor does “one embodiment” imply that there is but a single embodiment ofthe invention. For example, a feature, structure, act, etc. described in“one embodiment” may also be included in other embodiments. Thus, theinvention may include a variety of combinations and/or integrations ofthe embodiments described herein. Also, as used in this description, theterms “interaction” and “transaction” are synonymous.

While the invention has been particularly shown and described asreferenced to the embodiments thereof, those skilled in the art willunderstand that the foregoing and other changes in form and detail maybe made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of theinvention.

What is claimed is:
 1. A system for analyzing agent interactions,comprising: a calibration module to provide an interaction between anagent and a business to analysts; a score module to receive performancescores for the interaction from each of the analysts and to compare theperformance scores; a deviation module to determine a deviation betweenthe performance scores and to compare the deviation to a threshold; aninteraction distribution module to provide further interactions to atleast one of the analysts when the deviation falls below the threshold;and a feedback module to receive from the analyst, a further performancescore for the interaction and to provide the performance score to theagent associated with the interaction.